Which spotting scope to buy?

[seamaster]

Hi guys, I looking to buy a spotting scope and would really appreciate your advice...

I've pretty much given up on trying to find a cheap one and have decided to get a mid quality product.

The best "value" that i've seen is the Bushnell Discoverer 15-60x60mm. i actually handled one of these and I was impressed with it. It's only downfall is it's size and weight...17" long and too heavy to be a real contender for me but for the low $207 price tag and great performance make it a consideration.

Then consideration is the Bushnell 15-45x60mm Spacemaster, old model, which is on sale at optics planet for $214. I didn't handle or look thru this cope as no one in my area sells it. I've read that the old 50mm spacemaster was pretty decent. I'm confused here because the new 50mm that I've seen was collapsable and not impressive. Is this 60mm any good? It shows eye relief to be only 11mm which concerns me.

The next price point is $250 and up and what i really like are the Leupold Gold Ring compact spotting scopes, 10-20x40mm is $300 and their next size up is $400. Both are fairly comnpact and lieght weight with nice 17mm eye relief. I sometimes wear glasses and this would be very nice. But again, I never looked thru these either but I read good things.

So are the Gold Ring scopes too expensive for their size?
Is the 60mm Spacemaster the good one?

I looked at the cheaper bushnells, Burris, etc and wouldn't be satisfied with them.

My use fo rit would be on the range spotting targets out to 300 yards and for hunting.

Your advice, comments and other recommendations would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Seamaster

[RayB]

With no disrespect to the products you mentioned (they may be great!), I do know a thing or two about telescopes, and can point to some alternatives.

Telescopes come in three types: 1) Catoptric (using mirrors), 2) Dioptric (using lenses), and 3) Catadioptric (using both mirrors and lenses).

Most spotting scopes are small dioptric (refractor-type) telescopes.

Some are catadioptric (folded optic) compound scopes, that use a combination of lenses and mirrors.

The advantage of the latter type is that they "fold" the optical path to allow, say, a 12" tube to perform as if it were three feet long! A big scope in a small package! For real! :wow:

With small field scopes, you want them toughly built, weather-proofed to some degree, with factory collimated optics that hold their alignment. A smooth focuser and solid tripod is a must. Slow motion controls will quickly spoil you.

Better spotting scopes can be used to some degree for astronomy (a lot of fun while camping!), and double as excellent telephoto camera lenses. ;)

While it is possible to buy more than you need, I'd hate to see you spend 90% on a good scope, when 10% more might get you a great one!

Based on your post, you're already in this neighborhood, price-wise.

Visit here:

http://www.telescope.com/jump.jsp?itemType=CATEGORY&itemID=11

And call these guys with any questions you may have, about any of the optics they sell! Ask for the retail store.

I've received excellent merchandise, advice, and follow up service from these folks over the years! :thumbsup:

--Ray

[seamaster]

Thanks for your feedback.

I'm not sure how much I should spend but I have learned that what ever it is, it needs to be easy enough to replace because if it's expensive, I'll end up leaving it at home.

There's got to be a middle of the road scope that will meet my needs.

Has anybody seen the Brunton NRA Compact Spotting Scope 12-36x50?

It's spec's look good, waterproof, wide (205' at 12x) field of view and 20-17 mm eye relief. These sepc's almost sound too good! This one costs $139 at Opticsplanet or $199 everywhere else.

Thanks for your help,
Seamaster

[Wild Bill]

Do a Google search for Konus scopes. I just bought one a while ago and am very satisfied with it.
I got it at telescopes.com. They had the best price around.

[seamaster]

Which size did you get, 20-60x80, 15-45x65 or other? How well can you see with it at the higher magnification?

I got the Brunton NRA 12-36x50 in the mail today and I'm not very impressed. It's good up to approx. 20x but beyond that it get's tough to see anything well. It seems that I have to stick my eyeball to the glass to see thru it at the higher magnification. I'm not satisfied and will be returning it.

I looked thru a Bushnell Trophy and it wasn't impressive either, especially for costing more.

I'm leaning heavy towards the Discoverer 15-60x60 at this point.

The search continues...

Thanks for your help,
Seamaster

[RayB]

Here's more to assist you in your search...

Comparing Two Scopes:

The Bushnell 15-60X60 Discoverer has a zoom eyepiece. At 60X magnification, you get an exit pupil of 1 mm. In other words, the beam of light containing the image you will see, is only 1 mm wide, at 60X. It's not easy to line your eye up to a 1 mm projected image.

http://www.telescopes.net/a-l/bushnell_discoverer_spotting.html

Conversely, at 50X magnification the Orion Apex 90mm offers a 1.8 mm exit pupil, nearly twice that of the Bushnell. At 25X magnification it offers a 3.6 mm exit pupil. Consider, the Bushnell's 17-1/2 inches long, and the Orion is 11-inches long...

http://www.telescope.com/jump.jsp?itemType=CATEGORY&itemID=11

Here's the Optical Formulary:


Telescope Focal Length
______________________ = Magnification

Eyepiece Focal Length


Primary Aperture
______________________ = Exit Pupil

Eyepiece Magnification


Telescope Focal Length
______________________ = Focal Ratio

Telescope Aperture


Real World Formulary:

With good optics you can get 50- 60X magnification per inch of aperture

Adult (40+) pupils dilate to about 5 mm. 7 mm is the maximum human eyes can dilate, so anything beyond that is wasted.

Low f/numbers (f/7-) = wide fields & lower magnifications. High f/numbers (f/7+) = sharper contrast and higher magnifications.

--Ray

[seamaster]

Thanks for your continued help.

I know there's more factors but, do you know how much magnification is needed to see 0.3" bullet holes at 300 yrds?

Maybe with that I can narrow my search and I don't want to buy a scope that is larger than I need.

The difficult thing about buying a spotting scope were I live is that there are very few retailers that sell them.

Here in town, I have seen the Discoverer, Trophy, Sentry, Nikon XL and a old used B&L. There are telescopes at the science store but they are bigger than I want. That's all I have access to unless I make a trip to LA.

From what I saw so far, I like looking thru the Discoverer-1rst, Nikon XL-2nd and old B&L-3rd.

Your help is appreciated,
Seamaster

[RayB]

To answer your question, no, I don't know what magnification would just resolve those features at 300 yards.

But we can be less sophisticated about this... A magnification of 20X would make the holes appear only 45-feet (15-yards) away. 30X would make them appear 30-feet (10-yards) away. Surely you could see the latter. :thumbsup:

I honestly don't care what you pick, so long as you're pleased with it. But as I said, I will point to alternatives... The Orion scope is only 11" long, and in the price range of the Bushnell you describe; but it is considerably more powerful, due to the folded optics I described earlier.

* ---------------------> = Light Path

The Bushnell's optical path looks like this:

Eyepiece <------------------ * Objective Lens

A simple dioptric (refracting telescope), with a focal length equal to the distance between the objective and eyepiece lenses.

The Orion's optical path looks like this:

<------------------- * Objective Lens
Primary Mirror ------------------>
Eyepiece <---------- Secondary Mirror

A catadioptric (Maksutov-Cassegrain) design offering a focal length 3-times the actual length of its tube! Longer focal lengths mean greater magnification powers.

Orion is based near LA, if memory serves... I know they would let you return anything you didn't like...

At any rate, I think the Bushnell would do it for you. Good luck! :wavey:

--Ray

[seamaster]

Thank you again for your continued help.

I looked at the Apex 90 and I think it's big but I'm open to that now.

What do you think about this one...

http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=30&ProdID=196#description

Thanks,
Seamaster

[Fenwick223]

Most highpower and long range shooters use Kowa spotting scopes. They are the best. Some of the larger ones may be a little heavy for your use. I use the 661 with a 45 degree eyepiece although they are also available with a straight eyepiece. Again most highpower and long range shooters use the 45 degree because of the shooting positions required (i.e. prone). The other thing you have to consider is the power. The 27X you can use with shooting glasses; the variables you have to get your eye right down on the lens. Just google Kowa and read all about them.

[RayB]

Celestron has always made very good telescopes--they brought the Schmidt-Cassegrain (catadioptric) telescope to the backyard astronomer. Before them, it was a professionals-only celestial camera.

In the 80's Celestron wowed us with their C-90 spotting scope--a Maksutov-Cassegrain design with excellent performance in a tiny scope.

This C65 specs out very nicely--it's certainly the most rugged of the bunch so far. Nice features: rubber armor, water-proofed, 45* angle (upright image), slow motion controls. But at 65 mm, with the small central obstruction, it is at the small end size-wise, of what will give bright, clear images at higher powers. That's not to say it won't work.

As you see by the formulas I provided, magnification is a mathematical value: Telescope focal length divided by eyepiece focal length = magnification. So by that reckoning, any telescope could be almost any power; yes? Too bad it doesn't work that way. Those discount store scopes claiming 800-Power! may have done the math, but they've never looked through the eyepiece...

Other things happen as you magnify; the field of view shrinks and the
images get dimmer. The larger the primary aperture, the brighter the image at any given magnification. Assuming equal quality, a 90 mm scope will give much brighter images at higher magnifications than a 60 mm scope will. But how much is enough? You tell us.

The Kowa spotting scopes look like premium quality refractors, and while a bit spendy, may be well worth it. Japanese optics can be of outstanding quality.

--Ray

[seamaster]

I'm going to give the C65 Mini Mak a try. I like the slow motion tripod controls and I would't expect much from it beyond 40x. It's a heavy little bugger, 55 oz!

I read a lot of positive reviews on the Kowa scopes but I'm not quit there yet. This will be my first spotting scope and at some point I'll consider getting a better one.

Thanks again for your help,
Seamaster

[RayB]

Good luck! :thumbsup:

Let us know how this works out for you! ;)

Note: Since this scope has no finder, always start with the lowest magnification to center the target, then zero-in with high power.

--Ray

P.S. Just for kicks, if you ever want to turn this scope skyward, just let me know, and we'll address it off forum! :ufo:

[seamaster]

I spoke with the Celestron prodect support and their C65 can use other eyepieces.

Would there be any advantage to changing to a fixed eyepiece such as a 32mm or 40mm.

Those eyepieces cost about $53 and would need a T-adapter which is about $25. Changing to these eyepieces makes the scope no longer waterproof.

I will post a review once I get the scope and possible turn it to the sky. Now that it gets darker sooner and the time change this weekend, would make it worthwhile.

Thanks again for all your help,
Seamaster

[RayB]

Originally posted by seamaster
01) I spoke with the Celestron prodect support and their C65 can use other eyepieces.

02) Would there be any advantage to changing to a fixed eyepiece such as a 32mm or 40mm.

03) Those eyepieces cost about $53 and would need a T-adapter which is about $25. Changing to these eyepieces makes the scope no longer waterproof.


I'll address your questions in the order you asked them...

01) I wondered about the additional eyepiece thingy. The smaller and standard sized Celestron scopes all use 1.25" eyepieces--which is also an industry standard. But your scope has a "built-in" zoom eyepiece, which may complicate this.

02) Maybe a little, for eye-relief and wide field vistas. But not for gun-related use. Certainly yes, for increased power!

Since the supplied zoom covers 30X to 90X, I would avoid duplicating those powers. In this C65 scope, a 32 mm eyepiece would yield 26X, and a 40 mm would yield 21X magnification, with 2.50 and 3.10 mm exit pupils, respectively.

I might opt for the 40 mm (21X), and perhaps a 6 mm (139X). The practical upper limit for this scope is 128-154X magnification.

03) You could use anybody's 1.25" eyepieces--Orion, Meade, TeleVue, Edmund RKE, etc. Quality and prices vary greatly. Some eyepieces run $500.00 or more!

T-adapters are usually used for attaching cameras, so I'm fuzzy on this...

If you did this, would you forever compromise the water-proofing, or could this be restored by reattaching the OEM zoom? If the answer is a permanent compromise, I would not do it. If you find yourself strongly leaning this way, get a different scope--or later on, another one! Scopes can be a little like Glocks! :supergrin:

--Ray

[sillymike]

I've had good luck with the older spacemaster, various objective are availble for it, from 15x all the way to 60x
http://www.astroshop.de/images/thb_300/006/384.jpg


A friend as a little Nikon like this, it is also pretty nice and bright.
http://www.ol-optic.com/images/JUNIBDA014AE.gif

[seamaster]

OK, I'm now a spotting scope expert...ask me anything!

Purchase, return, purchase, return goes like this...


Scope #1,
Brunton NRA compact ~$150 - OK but past +20x, image quality gets poor and your eyeball needs to be glued to the lens.

I later noticed that this is the same scope that Celestron has for ~$80.

Scope #2,
Bushnell Discoverer 15-60x60 ~$200...very good quality and image clarity at all magnifications but it's big and heavy. It needs a very sturdy tripod otherwise it's length puts leverage on the mount making for a wobbly unstable viewing experience.

Scope #3,
Celestron Mini Mak 30-90x65mm ~$80...specs looked good but this thing is a joke! The image is hardly clear at it's minimum magnification of 30x so don't even try to zoom pat that because you won't see anything but a blur. It's junk so don't waste your time or money on it.

scope #4...Big suprise here!
Burris 12-24x50 Compact spotting scope = WOW! Compared to the others this one is a gem. Clear picture out to the edge and thru it's entire range from 12x to 24x. It's more clear at 24x than the Celestron is a 30x. The big suprise for me is that this scope is the best but I paid the least for it...$53 (NEW) on on ebay.

My only remaining test for it will be to see .30 cal holes on the target range but from the amount of detail I can see on a distant telephone pole, that should be easy!

Thanks again for your help and education in spotting scopes. It took a few but I finally found one that works for me.

Seamaster

[Yo]

Originally posted by Fenwick223
Most highpower and long range shooters use Kowa spotting scopes. They are the best. Some of the larger ones may be a little heavy for your use. I use the 661 with a 45 degree eyepiece although they are also available with a straight eyepiece. Again most highpower and long range shooters use the 45 degree because of the shooting positions required (i.e. prone). The other thing you have to consider is the power. The 27X you can use with shooting glasses; the variables you have to get your eye right down on the lens. Just google Kowa and read all about them.

Many highpower shooters use Kowas. Keep in mind however, that they do not need to see small bullet holes. They merely need to see the larger spotter markers on the target. Kowa makes a good scope, but the resolution and contrast is not in the same league as the high-end Zeiss, Swaro, Leica, or even the big Pentax. Look through a Zeiss and a Kowa side by side and you'll see a world of difference.

But it comes down to dollars. For most highpower shooters, a Kowa will do the job at 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of a Zeiss or Swaro. But if you want to reliably see 6mm and 6.5mm bullet holes at 500m and beyond, it pays to invest in a better spotting scope.

Link: http://www.6mmBR.com/spotterreview.html

[RayB]

Want to go ultra high-end?

Here are two 3.5" Questar Instruments...

One is a Spotting Scope, the other, an Astronomical Scope. They can be had at $2995.00 and $6995.00 respectively.

I did have the opportunity to view Saturn some years back, through a 3.5" model. While the image scale was not huge, that tiny rendition of the ringed planet was clear as a crystal. In fact, it looked fake, like an animated image; but it was real enough! ;)

--Ray